Blogger tio by LHL liao!

[Jman888]

  On 6/10/2014 at 4:47 PM, Fongmy said:

Then, hear our jman888, he is here all day long for current affairs, don't leave home without jman or what so ever

 

I was saying my friend Alex lah

[Darryn]

  On 6/10/2014 at 1:40 PM, Civic2000 said:

 

Let's hear from Nicole Seah (Taken from her Facebook)

Nicole Seah (佘雪玲)

I believe in the need for diversity in opinion and freedom of expression. But I cannot take on a us-versus-them at all cost approach when it comes to discussing such matters.

So even though I am an opposition supporter, I will also say that the whole defamation suit is thoroughly ridiculous on both parties and it's been politicized to create a false underdog martyrdom, when the whole crux of the matter really is - Don't make false and damaging claims that are unfounded and steeped in lies.

I know a lot of opposition parties and supporters are positioning this as a repression of the 99% in Singapore and human rights and whatnot, but it really isn't. And the whole matter has been blown out of proportion on both fronts.

For those who argue that it is about CPF, the bugbear with CPF is not transparency. It's really a stretch to claim that the government is cheating us of our money. The issue is with mismanaged expectations on how it's been allowed to be used for healthcare, housing, investment, etc. when one has all these big-ticket expenses to fulfill and finite funds in the pocket. That's another issue that takes into account housing prices, healthcare premiums and subsidies, and the like.

It's good for society to have the ability to express ourselves, but we also need to have discernment to look beyond seeing a situation in a simplistically black or white fashion.

- This statement has been made in Nicole's personal capacity and is not reflective of any professional or political organisation.

 

 

Wish Nicole posted here so could praise her personally -

 

but I find this a very mature post and point of view - good on her!

 

 

[Vidz]

see la... kong chiao way

tio pork liao already

Edited June 11, 2014 by Vidz

[Count-Bracula]

  On 6/9/2014 at 5:25 AM, Tt_hh said:

is it gombak?? Now under pap doesnt seems clean too leh...

Slum from what I see when I'm there.

[Tigerwoods]

  On 6/10/2014 at 11:31 AM, Joseph22 said:

no no.. not you stupid.. but ginger is old one hotter

91 yo ginger you want ?

[Darryn]

  On 6/10/2014 at 2:12 PM, Moniq said:

 

 

In fact i found TTSH's comment of his dismissal is well phrased. It says "...conduct incompatible with the values and standards expected of employees..." up to how you want to intrepret it. TTSH mentioned Roy is gulity of misusing working time and hospital resources for personal interest and no mention of his allegations or lawsuits.

 

 

 

Have to disagree on this - I think the dismissal letter is poorly thought through and poorly written.

 

Based on the assumption that they really did warn Roy, with both a written warning and verbal reminders and these were properly recorded, and that they have the appropriate level of "evidence" to "prove" that he was using hospital resources in such a way and that it impacted his performance I would ONLY have written that.

 

For me, if I was writing the letter, I would have stayed focussed on his work performance - in this regard, with a formal warning, and also other "reminders" they already have enough to terminate him for facebooking etc instead of working.

 

Why even mention what he is doing, who he is doing it for and the (so far unproven) defamation case?

 

Se the attached letter - the very first sentence talks about the "politics" of Roy's employment.

 

They dedicate TWO paragraphs to what he is doing in public (blue outine) vs only ONE paragraph (red outline) to his work performance.

 

If you were "analysing" any document outside of other information - which topic would you say was the bigger motivator in the action? The one where there are two paragraphs talking about it, and that is mentioned first. Or the one that has only half as much space and is mentioned second?

 

I am, and have always been, very uncomfortable with this idea of "private" life being judged by your employer and becoming grounds for dismissal - in this instance, I feel that TTSH have overstepped bounds - while it may well be true that what he is doing is "incompatible" with what they expect in an employee - they should not have said it out like that, and I very very much hope that there are no other employees that have been involved in any sort of similar cases before.

ttsh.pdfFetching info...

[Tigerwoods]

  On 6/10/2014 at 12:58 PM, Vid said:

 

Ah... but you forgot who owns MCF

they have been reading careful and making notes and marking you and me already.

every night you worry got people knocking your door at 3am..

[RadX]

  On 6/11/2014 at 12:55 AM, Tigerwoods said:

they have been reading careful and making notes and marking you and me already.

every night you worry got people knocking your door at 3am..

 

 

naah, that is the time you have morning wood. they are kind to do it AFTER that....

[Vid]

  On 6/11/2014 at 12:55 AM, Tigerwoods said:

they have been reading careful and making notes and marking you and me already.

every night you worry got people knocking your door at 3am..

 

Every night we surf MCF until 3:05 am and if nobody knocks on the door, we are safe

[Darryn]

OF course,

 

HIndsight is a wonderful thing, but looking back on it now - wouldn't it have been fantastic if Roy had made some posts back when he first got the lawyer's letter talking about being intimidated by the letter, about how he, as a minnow, was scared of taking on the might and resources of one of SIngapore's richest men.

 

Also throwing in the idea that the Honorable Mr Singh was a scion and leader of the legal community, and that Roy, with meagre resources at his disposal couldn't hope to compete - that to try and take on this sort of strength, resources and experience as a poor salaried worker would be rather like Tampines Rovers trying to compete Manchester United (or perhaps Munster trying to compete with the All Blacks)

 

IF he had done this - he would now be in a position to talk about his "admission" of having defamed LHL was a "tactical retreat" (I am very very sure that he would be able to find much precedence in the legal world for people having "admitted" defamation or having been found guilty of slander that were later vindicated or found to have been speaking the truth)

[Goldbug]

Roy kenna sacked liao

Everybody happy

What is the issue?

[Mustank]

WhOa !!! 100 page!!!!!

  On 6/11/2014 at 1:12 AM, Goldbug said:

Roy kenna sacked liao

Everybody happy

What is the issue?

Sheryl crow: if it makes you happy.mp4

[Acemundo]

  On 6/11/2014 at 12:55 AM, Darryn said:

 

 

Why even mention what he is doing, who he is doing it for and the (so far unproven) defamation case?

 

Se the attached letter - the very first sentence talks about the "politics" of Roy's employment.

 

They dedicate TWO paragraphs to what he is doing in public (blue outine) vs only ONE paragraph (red outline) to his work performance.

 

If you were "analysing" any document outside of other information - which topic would you say was the bigger motivator in the action? The one where there are two paragraphs talking about it, and that is mentioned first. Or the one that has only half as much space and is mentioned second?

 

I am, and have always been, very uncomfortable with this idea of "private" life being judged by your employer and becoming grounds for dismissal - in this instance, I feel that TTSH have overstepped bounds - while it may well be true that what he is doing is "incompatible" with what they expect in an employee - they should not have said it out like that, and I very very much hope that there are no other employees that have been involved in any sort of similar cases before.

very simple. the people at TTSH and even MOH that drafted such replies were also eager to get into good books of his highness vis a vis the clout of Paul Lampard. that's why decorum and protocol considerations are thrown out of the window. supporting or standing on same side of the highness is more important to them.

[Dfx16]

I'm quite out of touch with this saga

Is this type of lawsuit is also happening around the world?

For eg. US/UK etc leader sue its ordinary citizen for seeking an audit report?

 

I mean we can see many defamation going on even in boleh land

Did anyone of it ordinary citizen got sue?

Forget about Anwar he's not ordinary

[Ktglfc]

  On 6/11/2014 at 1:34 AM, Acemundo said:

very simple. the people at TTSH and even MOH that drafted such replies were also eager to get into good books of his highness vis a vis the clout of Paul Lampard. that's why decorum and protocol considerations are thrown out of the window. supporting or standing on same side of the highness is more important to them.

 

Actually, we all more or less expected this to happen, right?

Are we very very surprised?

 

Hmm.. as far as I can gather some coffeeshop remarks, we are not really that surprised

[Darryn]

  On 6/11/2014 at 1:34 AM, Acemundo said:

very simple. the people at TTSH and even MOH that drafted such replies were also eager to get into good books of his highness vis a vis the clout of Paul Lampard. that's why decorum and protocol considerations are thrown out of the window. supporting or standing on same side of the highness is more important to them.

Which is kinda the whole point and crux of what I was saying -

 

I can fully understand WHY they might do it, and on the whole, it MIGHT payoff to be seen to be standing on the side of the powerful in this issue -

 

But for me, I would have avoided the whole "political" aspect entirely -

 

It looks like they have enough grounds to fire him without even needing to mention the defamation - if so - why open that can of worms and leave themselves open to accusations of meddling in politics

[macrotrust2]

  On 6/11/2014 at 1:34 AM, Acemundo said:

very simple. the people at TTSH and even MOH that drafted such replies were also eager to get into good books of his highness vis a vis the clout of Paul Lampard. that's why decorum and protocol considerations are thrown out of the window. supporting or standing on same side of the highness is more important to them.

TTSH and MOH are doing the "right" thing as you cannot allow someone within the organisation to "bring down" the people working there. Roy is not representative of the company he is working for- this is his personal goal- nothing to do with company

 

Sooner or later better to have a clean break- as to pursue his own agenda- rather than drag everyone down in that organisation or to be associated with him whether good or bad- as he already explained himself clearly which is taking a toll on his work- which is true legal suit.

[Acemundo]

  On 6/11/2014 at 1:38 AM, Ktglfc said:

 

Actually, we all more or less expected this to happen, right?

Are we very very surprised?

 

Hmm.. as far as I can gather some coffeeshop remarks, we are not really that surprised

overall, I am not surprised. but I am somewhat surprised these people don't care a hoot about public sentiments towards them. I was expecting them to depart from the strongarm tactics used in the past or at least mix it to make the approach appear more palatable to the public.